Kantian ethics Flashcards
(17 cards)
What is our duty according to Kant?
Acting morally according to good regardless of the consequences
What should we NOT base our views on?
1) We shouldn’t base our views of right and wrong on consequences as these are not within our control
2) We should not base our decisions on our inclinations, as our emotions change on a regular basis.
Does Kant believe it is possible to work out what our duty is?
Yes, by establishing what sort of command (or imperative) lies behind it. When we carry out an action, we have a rule or maxim in mind. We need to establish whether it is a hypothetical imperative or categorical imperative.
What is a hypothetical imperative?
A command that it followed to achieve a desired result. They are ‘if….’ commands
What is a categorical imperative?
A command that is good in itself regardless of consequences
How do we find the categorical imperative?
1) Formula of the law of nature (universal law)
2) Person as ends
3) Kingdom of ends
What is the kingdom of ends?
It is a combination of the first two. kant asks us to imagine we are part of the law-making group in an imaginary country where everyone always treats others as an end. Kant suggests that a categorical imperative is an imperative that would be permitted in such a place
criticism of kants attempt to withdraw emotion
Kant’s ethical system attempts to withdraw from emotions, yet emotions are fundamental drivers shaped by millions of years of evolution to guide human survival and social cooperation. Modern moral psychology supports this view, showing that emotions are deeply intertwined with moral reasoning and decision-making, rather than being obstacles to it. By ignoring the evolutionary role of emotions, Kant’s rigid rationalism risks detaching morality from the very instincts that enable humans to navigate complex social environments effectively.
Kants ethical theory is deontological, what are problems with this?
Kant’s ethical system dangerously ignores the moral weight of consequences, focusing solely on rigid duty regardless of real-world outcomes. This abstraction fails to account for the profound impact our actions have on others’ lives, making it impractical and disconnected from human experience. Morality cannot be blind to consequences—our ethical decisions must consider the tangible effects they produce.
What is a problem with having an absolutist view of duty?
Kantian ethics is built on the idea that moral duties are absolute and must be followed without exception. However, in real life, duties can sometimes come into direct conflict with one another, creating moral dilemmas that Kant’s framework struggles to resolve. For example, the duty to tell the truth might clash with the duty to protect someone from harm. Kant’s system offers no clear mechanism for prioritizing one duty over another when they contradict, since all duties are viewed as equally binding. This rigidity can leave moral agents confused or forced to choose between equally uncompromising obligations, making Kant’s ethics less practical for navigating the complex, often messy realities of everyday moral decision-making
What problem did Satre find with Kantian ethics?
- Sartre claimed duties can clash.
- A soldier could either go to war to defend their country, or they could stay home and look after their sick parent.
- Both actions are universalizable and neither treats persons as mere means, therefore both actions are their duty according to Kant’s ethics.
- Yet, they cannot do both.
The three postulates
- Kant argues that reason can figure out this basis for ethics. However, he doesn’t think that ethics makes sense without three postulates.
- A postulate is something you have to assume to be true in order to have a basis for reasoning about something.
- Kant thought that there were three postulates we have to assume to be true if ethics is to be based on reason:
1) God.
2) Immortality (of the soul in an afterlife).
3) Free will. Kant thought that without free will, we could not be responsible for our actions and thus surely ethics would be pointless.
Kant points out that good people are not always…
Kant pointed out that good people are not always rewarded in life, and some times bad people do seem to be rewarded. This was unjust. For ethics to work, there needs to be justice. So, Kant thought that there must be a God who lets us in to an afterlife where good people are rewarded with happiness. Kant called this the ‘summum bonum’, meaning the highest good.
Kants basis
Enlightenment thinkers like Kant wanted to solve the problem that those of different faiths could never come to agreement. Religious warfare had been greatly destructive in Europe. Kant’s solution was to base religion and ethics on reason, not faith. Reason is universal in that everyone has it, but not everyone shares the same faith. If ethics could be based on reason, Kant conceived a more harmonious society would follow. There would at least be the hope of coming to agreement through rational discussion
Quote from Kant - enlightenment
“Enlightenment is man’s emergence from his self-imposed immaturity” – Kant
Autonomy
Faith-based morality push laws on people as if they were children. Kant thought humanity was ready for greater autonomy, figuring out and following the moral laws themselves through their own reason and choice. This new enlightened stage of civilisation would make global co-operation possible. A new kind of agency was emerging. The rational will of the individual can choose to align itself with universal laws. Not arbitrary laws forced on them by authority, but laws whose authority consists in the citizen’s autonomous adoption of them due to their rationality.
What is universalisabiility a version of?
Universalisability is a secularised version of the golden rule, to treat others as you would like to be treated
